The Bush Administration is revolutionary in their appalling brashness. Once, lying to congress was a serious allegation. Today, to the repukeliscum, it is part of the job. They are not offended by lying. They expect and PLAN to lie. I have never heard, in my life, of responding to a request to testify by taking the 5th WITHOUT EVEN HEARING A QUESTION. NOT EVEN HEARING A QUESTION. It's really shocking. The whole pattern indicates that 1) important questions will arise 2) lies will be told and 3) the lies might imperil the liar.

If you're not shocked and appalled by this Nazi-like behavior, you are a Repukeliscum or Al or some other moronic twit.

The special place in Hell awaiting Gonzo includes a waterboard.

This is a direct result of the fact that our poitical system has tolerated the amoral thug Karl Rove at the helm of the affairs of the state. I think that the damage to our body politic is irreversible in that nothing will happen to Mr. Gonzales just has Mr. Libby got away with perjury.

His boss doesn't care? Why do you think he keeps him around? Gonzales is still AG precisely BECAUSE he is willing, even eager, to lie under oath. If he wasn't he'd have been shitcanned by Mr. Bush ages ago. His boss cares deeply about this, just not in the sense that you would like him to.

Impeach the radicals. Now.

The Bush Administration is revolutionary in their appalling brashness.

Paul Krugman, in the indroduction to The Great Unravelling:

Back in 1957, Henry Kissenger -- then a brilliant, iconoclastic young Harvard scholar, with his eventual career as cynical political manipulator and, later, as crony capitalist still far in the future -- published his doctoral dissertation, A World Restored.

One wouldn't think that a book about the diplomatic efforts of Metternich and Castlereagh is relevant to U.S. politics in the twenty-first century. But the first three pages of Kissinger's book sent chills down my spine, because they seem all too relevant to current events.

In those first few pages, Kissinger describes the problems confronting a heretofore stable diplomatic system when it is faced with a "revolutionary power" -- a power that does not accept that system's legitimacy. ... It seems clear to me that one should regard America's right-wing movement -- which now in effect controls the administration, both houses of Congress, much of the judiciary, and a good slice of the media -- as a revolutionary power in Kissinger's sense. That is, it is a movement whose leaders do not accept the legitimacy of our current political system. [pp 5-6]

No no, these people need to be held to account. For the sake of our children, these criminals need to be punished severely.
It should have started with Nixon. That might have precluded Iran-Contra. And that might have precluded this disaster of an administration.
The President's pardon capability needs to be modified to only apply to those tried, convicted, and sentenced.
After all, as we learned during the Clinton years, it's the investigation that's really damaging. And if the pardon preempts any one investigation, it effectively aborts all other derivative inquiries.
In summary:
Hang em high on the White House lawn.

POed Lib: The Bush Administration is revolutionary in their appalling brashness.

so what are you going to do about it?

huh?

I think that the case with Miers is that she won't lie under oath, and she won't assert privilege where she believes there is none. This puts her in a position to give fairly damaging testimony, so the WH needs her to not show up at all, which, apparently, she is willing to do.

I think she can be cracked, and persuaded to testify. It'll take some strategy and some patience, but I'll bet it will be worth it.

The question is, what in the long run? What of the next administration? What pattern has this set? Will this create an expectation of lies and obfuscation for all future administrations? That is such a discouraging and hopeless thought, eh? Lies and dissemulation for the next 100 years? The AG in front of Congress telling lies or whatever he wants, with no reference to facts or reality, from now on?

Is that what the Repukeliscum REALLY want?

{Sarcasm}
Wrong again, Kevin! President Bush is showing strong leadership in exerting Executive powers which were weakened by the overreaching Congress after Watergate. In addition, Clinton tarnished the office and Bush's assertion of power brings back the strength of the office.

This country needs a strong Executive branch, especially an Attorney General who is willing to stand up to the Defeatocrat Congress, in order to keep our Homeland Strong!

{/Sarcasm}

We need a constitutional amendment restricting Presidential pardons. I would add the sentence "subject to the advice and consent of the Senate" to the pardon process.

About Gonzales: "He doesn't care, and neither does his boss." That appears obvious now.

Why don't they care? I see only two choices, not necessarily mutually exclusive.

1. The members of the Bush administration are so entirely out of touch with reality and with American politics that they don't really understand how much they are disrespected and ignored. This is taking the form that might be called insanity. Or

2. The members of the Bush administration feel they have enough control over government that they can now ignore the Constitution, Congress and the Courts and do not plan to leave office in January 2009.

I don't see a third choice, and my belief that number 2 is totally unrealistic is wavering badly. How else can Abu Gonzales' smirk and his indifference to what the Senators asked and said be explained?

Sigh, ...... makes one wish for the ol days o' blowjob.

These guys didn't lie to congress -

In their minds; they lied to the treasonous enemy within their own country. The Duly Elected Representatives of the American People.

To them, any act (including torture, and violation of our sacred liberties) is acceptable, as long as it means defeating the treasonous enemy within their own country; The Duly Elected Representatives of the American People.

If Congress were a Republican majority, they wouldn't be asking all these awkward questions; this wouldn't be a problem.

About Presidential Pardons --

If everyone who received a Presidential Pardon had to testify to Congress about what his crime was and why he received a Pardon, under penalty of Perjury if he or she lied, then bad Pardons would rebound back on the President and his party. The Fifth Amendment is not an issue since the Pardon already provide immunity for the original crime. Perjury, however, would be a new crime.

This could be done and recorded, then the hearing could be published on the Internet. Anyone who wants to see it could click on the site. I can see some fascinating dissertations and books coming out of this.

Make Pardons totally open. If the pardon is for purely political reasons, then they would fail because they would create more political backlash than they would ever prevent. Also, a purely political Pardon would also set someone up for public shame and opprobrium. As they should be. "Scooter" Libby, for example.

That also doesn't require amending the Constitution. Open government and the Internet make that difficult action unnecessary

In re Rick B:(2. The members of the Bush administration feel they have enough control over government that they can now ignore the Constitution, Congress and the Courts and do not plan to leave office in January 2009) and referencing POed Lib: Is that what the Repukeliscum REALLY want?

If one party takes steps to change profoundly and permanently the organic law of a country in a way that could redound to their disadvantage upon their inevitable return to opposition (Pres. Hilary, anyone?) then it's reasonable to at least consider that they don't intend to ever return to opposition again.

Is Cheney content to see his Incredible Metastatizing Executive revert to the Democrats, upon their eventually regaining the White House?

No sane man whittles a switch and hands it to another man to beat him with.

So either there's no switch -- these expanded powers don't exist, or the recent actions of the executive actually restricts -- or there's no intention to hand the switch to another man -- or the man's not sane.

Too bad the fate of the Republic depends on the third choice being the right one.

We need a constitutional amendment restricting Presidential pardons.

Or we just need a Congress that is going to do its job with its existing powers. Of course, if the Congress isn't willing to do that, giving it more powers won't magically make it willing to stand up to the President, either.

If perjury convictions can be willfully and succesfully pardoned, why not lie, even under oath?

Nothing to lose, everything to gain.

I think that the case with Miers is that she won't lie under oath

Do we have any evidence for this other than a much-quoted, off-the-cuff remark by John Dean?

I mean, I hope it's true. I hope this, rather than WH dismay at Sara Taylor's bumblings, is the reason Miers was MIA at the hearings.

But...John Dean. And we should remember that unfacile liars do not generally work for the Bush family for as long as Miers did.

Well, hell, even a guy like Abrams, who was convicted in Iran-Contra, and was one of Bush's first named appointees (a very bad sign, in January 2001; no Kevin, Bush was NOT "reaching out to the other side"), or how about G. Gordon Liddy, who did time, and is still a conservative mouthpiece?

It's never over for these guys. Even when we successfully imprison them, they get out, and their money and connections put them right back into positions of power again.

"I don't see a third choice"

I do, although its likelihood is anyone's guess.

The Bush administration simply doesn't care about opinion polls since Bush isn't running for reelection and neither is Cheney. They refuse to replace Gonzalez because they know that a Democratic Senate is not likely to accept another sycophant for attorney general and even a quasi-independent attorney general could do enormous damage to the Bush administration, given the level of malfeasance and the contempt for the law that they have demonstrated.

As for the radical growth in executive power, I would argue that they are turning the executive into an all-powerful daddy figure, thereby giving Republican candidates an advantage in the years ahead. Moreover, the growth of presidential power is in areas that Democratic candidates are less likely to exploit, or if they do, it will be in ways that Republicans like.

The Bush administration simply doesn't care about opinion polls since Bush isn't running for reelection and neither is Cheney.

The time has come to re-examine the plush retirements that former presidents now enjoy.

They refuse to replace Gonzalez because they know that a Democratic Senate is not likely to accept another sycophant for attorney general and even a quasi-independent attorney general could do enormous damage to the Bush administration, given the level of malfeasance and the contempt for the law that they have demonstrated.

Yes, and even beyond that, another AG candidate who possesses Abu's history with the Bush family--and his level of slavering servitude to same--doesn't exist. Never mind getting someone else through Senate confirmation; there just isn't anybody with as much information about where the bodies are buried and as much personal participation in the grave digging.

As for the radical growth in executive power, I would argue that they are turning the executive into an all-powerful daddy figure, thereby giving Republican candidates an advantage in the years ahead. Moreover, the growth of presidential power is in areas that Democratic candidates are less likely to exploit, or if they do, it will be in ways that Republicans like.

Absolutely. They know that Republican voters will flock to this kind of authoritarianism, and they're taking a calculated risk that Democratic presidents will not abuse these powers to the same extent or in areas that Republicans find offensive.

This is the same kind of minimal risk they took when threatening the Congressional minority with the nuclear option. They were reasonably certain that a Democratic majority, lacking unity of message, purely hierarchical organization and utter ruthlessness, wouldn't and couldn't play like that. And they were right, weren't they?

Why doesn't someone suggest to Gonzales that will will be in need of a pardon from President Bush since the statute of limitation on perjury before Congress will still be open in 2009 when we have a real AG running the Justice Department?

The comment made by "President Bush" - "So what are you going to do about it? Huh?" struck home. The sad reality is I, like most of the people on this blog site, end up making a smart short blog remark as a response. Unfortunately, that is not enough.

I think one of the odd things going on is there are no major protests or demonstrations in response. A few years ago I attended a big anti-war rally and march. It turned me off because the leadership of the march and many of the participants were marginalized anti-everything type people. (There were also a number of cops trying to be undercover.)

Does anyone know about any upcoming March on Washington or rally to protest this outrageous behavior? I getting to the place, I may have to get off my butt and organize one.

It turned me off because the leadership of the march and many of the participants were marginalized anti-everything type people.

Where is Secular Animist, anyway?

"Yes, and even beyond that, another AG candidate who possesses Abu's history with the Bush family--and his level of slavering servitude to same--doesn't exist"

Harriet Miers.

Remember that Libby was not PARDONED. His sentence was 'commuted'.

Er... what's the difference you ask?

A commuted sentence means that the subject is still protected from self-incrimination under the 5th amendment and cannot be compelled to testify.

A fully pardoned Libby could be compelled to testify under penalty of contempt of court.

The Bush legal machine is fully aware of this.

It turned me off because the leadership of the march and many of the participants were marginalized anti-everything type people.

In all seriousness, the rallies in my neck of the woods are attracting more mainstream folks these days.

I believe that all the Republican's actions can be understood when viewed through this filter: they only feel responsible to those who voted for them (more importantly those who funded their election). This really came home to me when John Bolton was interviewed on the Daily Show and said 'The President has a responsibility to be true to the people who voted for him'. Of course, the rest of us shouldn't expect a tax refund anytime soon in compensation.

I dread to find out how far they are willing to go to be true to 'their' people, and f*** 'We the People'.

Those who are turned off by the street protests/protesters but who still want to take some form of action should check the Iraq Moratorium website.

Allison Druin and
Susan Zemsky and
Rabbi Gerrald Serotta, Temple Shalom

Dear Rabbi and Sisters,

In an ongoing series of events nearing three years ,which includes torture, abuse, racial discrimination,Death threats and poisoning, spanning various States in USA,which has been very difficult to endure and very little help being extended or received so far, it would be easy for any one to loose faith in Humanity.
I have very little reason to doubt that the people involved, apart from Catholic and other christian denominations, A power full and vicious circle from US intelligence services like FBI and CIA are being involved in most of these activities, which include a 24/7 open jail system under which i am being kept,further involving hundreds of street , Homeless and social workers, police and Govt employs resulting in Death threats lock ups and detainment at various locations in NEW YORK, CA , UTAH,and now in WASHINGTON DC, would only dwarf the Guantanamo bay trails.
Often being called OSAMA BIN LADEN and TERRORIST and ARAB etc, by the people around which number in hundreds clouding the fact that my lineage for the past 1000 years would hardly would have any connection and i am hardly being a practitioner of religion except for being interested in Buddhism and having at least visited church regularly for two years ( Including the MORMON church)my arrival to US under suspicious and dramatic circumstances has only been in the year of 2004 and before that having never left India, would hardy suggest that i would have anything to with the events of 9/11.
but to my astonishment and subsequently to an on going torture that was unleashed up on me, the people who are involved, in the day to day operations of what i had described above and earlier are the high level intelligence community associated with FBI/CIA.As to in what way these high profile 9/11 investigators have found anything of interest in me in their wildest dreams is left to any ones imagination, but the involvement of these officials and my several meetings with them and the treatment i have been receiving on behalf and at the commands of these operative would potentially undermine my life. except for having knowledge of the events of 9/11 thorough newspapers and Internet i have no clue or idea nor i have been part of any conspiracy group nor i have known any one or associated with, which would been a situation with millions of Americans and many more across the world, but how is that i have been singled out by the officers like DON HINES, ( In various meetings conducted in DC ACLU office)who identifies him self as Executive director of ACLU, Washington DC( where as he is not) and previously during my arrival and captivity in CA by a Vietnam veteran who is/was working for intelligence dept. who had sought to inquire me for a whole night, during my journey from CA to NEW YORK, only mystifies as to what purpose they have sought me out.
Besides these people and many other threatening and telling me from time to time that my seeking help is of no use as even UN Human Rights would be of little help.
First of all I am not a Muslim as I have mentioned and I do not remotely prescribe to any form of violence or religion or religious aggression no matter who is the victim.
But the constant attempts to poison and assault me causing untold trauma and no human help being extended so far makes it very difficult for me to have any faith in humanity besides raising doubt as to why these Intelligence officials are after me, which is as the saying goes, "there is more to it than meets the eye". As i gather from my conversations with these operatives, who might be top intelligence operatives connected with 9/11 events and as a matter of fact all my requests for help have resulted more in in endangering my life and torture as I am being repeatedly told by Mr HINES that not even UN can help me ...?
As i have many times tried to leave US which resulted in futility and no help being extended by The Indian Embassy in DC and more over my treatment by various people ( social workers and staff of places where i was living) only suggests that i am actually a detainee under high and constant surveillance...?
I have by now forgotten to count how many times i have been poisoned in each of these cities, few times even being denied medical attention and many times ending up in emergency only to be told that they have found nothing like poison in their lab tests, explains how deep the problem is involving high and mighty.
As most of my belongings being stolen ( Two laptops and One 35 Camera kit , passport and all of my luggage, money)there is no way of proving my identity, Which all the more makes even common place situations look suspicious in my attempt to interact with others and most often the people who interact with me are agents and street operatives and informants in addition to Police, who fallow me in the streets on a regular basis.
It is most likely these officials/Operatives are picking some innocent people from all over the world and torture them and lure them using various means to involve in their not so legal activities.which only reminds me the involvement of a German team, a woman psychologist and another male who identified him self as a spy had offered to pay money for my needs and when i had declined their offer, he became threatening and people were seen knocking my cottage and circling during midnight, while i was at a Buddhist monastery last December.
( As the abbot informed me that these people actually came from Germany and I am under The Homeland security, in response to my request to be a volunteer for their ongoing activities)
So, is the case with WHITNEY GRETCHEN of Catholic charities in Washington DC,where i was kept for all most one year , who had also tried to woo me With some false offers and favors, was later on involved in sending homeless street gangs from black communities to beat me up more than once.
If it is true i believe there has also been an attempt to kidnap me and take or send me to PAKISTAN (while i was in NEW YORK) while inviting me to visit the Pakistani military ship, which was on a visit to NEW YORK is more than a coincidence. the manager and his staff of Pakistan origin, who asked me for three days, have later on tried to drug me and beat me up, some of his friend urging me that, i should become a MUSLIM and fight for Pakistan etc.
The series of past and ongoing events and my various attempts to seek help having come to nothing, I am on the verge of continued despondency and loss of faith in humanity.It would only make me wonder as to the nature of human integrity and American democracy,if a person like me were to be subjected to this kind of treatment, then it only raises questions like, is it the same with every American or the once like me me who have come to America. Is this is the day to day reality of a world's well known democracy, Is American is a country with no humanity which can come to the rescue of Innocent people and is it true that the events of 9/11 have to be looked at with suspicion,is it more so that no one in this country cares for truth or for humanity, are the kind of questions that not only bother me but it is for every one to examine.The need for finding out the reason for such atrocious activities, people like me are being subjected, who even in their wildest dreams are not even connected with 9/11, then how is it, such high profile intelligence officials/operatives have been chasing me for the last three years, while no one is willing to care or listen is something humanity needs to ponder for the safety of its future , which in turn will not only benefit the US and also the world. By which many of innocent people will be spared of the torture.
Each time i mention the people or the events they would dramatically disappear until other new people enter the scene.
It is most likely that by the time you would have read this mail ,I might have been picked up or some one in the streets (may be a black guy) would have stabbed me or a car / truck might run over me or I would be FOOD POISONED, like in the past as i have been count less times.Since my memory is waning after series of traumatic events it would be difficult to remember how many times( at this very moment after four days of Food poisoning i stomach feels like a cluster bomb has exploded) ,Or may be shot dead and killed by million known and unknown ways that FBI/CIA /CATHOLIC etc employs on people like me..
(though even to this day I remain failing to understand as to why do i deserve to be singled out and be treated like the way i am and who is most likely to gain by such mechanization's)
In the end it only leaves me with very little to say as I see very little humanity or hope around me.
Thanking you for your patience.
with warm regards,

Raja Indrakaran.
Washington DC.

Harriet Miers.

Maybe. But she's a behind-the-scenes kind of Bush house elf and hasn't got Abu's experience with publicly brazening out the worst Bushco crimes. Perhaps she'd be able to; I don't know. Like others here, I would be really, really interested to see her giving testimony.

A Congress that is going to do its job with its existing powers is a congress with a large progressive majority!

At first I read your post to say that Gonzales "died under oath." Oh well. A guy can dream can't he?

[T]hey're taking a calculated risk that Democratic presidents will not abuse these powers to the same extent or in areas that Republicans find offensive.

Posted by: shortstop on July 25, 2007 at 3:42 PM

Hmmm, would this include Democratic presidents like FDR who on his own authority ordered the internment and confiscation of property of a hundred thousand American citizens of Japanese origin? Or Harry Truman who used the atomic bomb to kill the emeny and save American lives. Or like JFK and LBJ who got us deeper into Vietnam, who placed illegal wiretaps on MLK and used the FBI to infiltrate and spy on American citizens that they considered to be a risk to national security?

Probably not, you must be referring to the post-1972 fully castrated Dems who are in charge now, right?

It's kind of interesting how the politics of the contempt citation and related issues are playing out.

It used to be a bad sign for generating political hay out of an issue if votes were strictly along party lines. The idea was that such a vote could be dismissed as purely partisan, and so could not represent an issue that was by any objective standard good or bad. If there was nothing objectively good or bad in an issue, a vote couldn't damage either party too much.

But we are not in that environment or presumption anymore. Republicans have lined up far too many times on the side of issues that the American people KNOW are wrong. Now, I believe, these party line votes are tremendously damaging to the GOP. They lose credibility and respect each and every time they support the Bush WH, and precisely because they DO support it with virtually no exception and with no protest -- indeed, quite willingly.

It's actually quite remarkable how they can't stop themselves. They know perfectly well that their views and votes are going to wreak huge damage on them in 2008 -- and they continue to hew to the path blazed by Bush.

I think that historians are going to look back at this era and wonder how the Republicans couldn't put any brake on their motion, though they saw the rails ahead lying in shreds.

"But she's a behind-the-scenes kind of Bush house elf and hasn't got Abu's experience with publicly brazening out the worst Bushco crimes."

She also would not be likely to be approved by the Senate. There are others the White House could bring up (Fielding, perhaps), but they all have the same problem -- the really extreme and sycophantic ones are just not likely to make it out of committee. They'd need to find an unknown, and even there the committee would grill the hell out of them.

In any case, I just don't see it happening unless someone brings perjury charges against Gonzalez or impeaches him. He already has no credibility, no trust, no political capital, nothing, and yet he's still around. If he or his boss had any sense of shame or public duty, he'd have been gone months ago.

"Hmmm, would this include Democratic presidents like FDR"

Then we can safely assume that you oppose Bush's radical expansion of presidential authority, right, dear?

Oh, and dear heart, bringing up matters that people are, correctly, ashamed of, does not do Bush any good.

We are well on our way to Nazi Germany-style fascist government. In Nazi Germany, the adherence, within the government, to the rule of law by 1941 or so was simply non-existant. If you were close to Hitler, you could do as you wished. That's what the Repukeliscum want, and what we are verging upon getting - a government of the Repukeliscum gang, doing whatever it wants, giving money to its cronies, and no one to stop them.

Chicounsel, are you arguing that today's Republicans find suspension of habeas corpus, dropping of bombs, and warrantless wiretapping and surveillance of American citizens (including influential brown-skinned ones) offensive?

No, I thought not.

Your thinking is as hilariously confused as ever. You can't decide whether to lambast yesteryear's Democrats for abusing power, or call today's crew stoneless for not shredding the Constitution.

PaulB, we're not in disagreement. Look, no one Bush would name--keeping in mind Bush's continuing criminality as well as his petulant adolescent defiance--would make it through confirmation. My point, and I could have made it a lot more effectively than I did, was that Bush needs Abu where he is, both to continue doing his bidding and to ensure the bodies stay buried. He has no one else in the wings who can really replace him properly, and certainly no potential AG who has been as deeply involved in the criminal escapades of this administration and has as much to lose if this all comes out.

That's all I meant by saying "forget getting someone else through confirmation"--it's never going to get to that point because Bush can't afford to let Gonzales resign.

frankly0: It's actually quite remarkable how they can't stop themselves. They know perfectly well that their views and votes are going to wreak huge damage on them in 2008 -- and they continue to hew to the path blazed by Bush.

I have wondered about this as well. It's almost as though they're closing their eyes and hoping for a return to the very recent days when no stunt was outrageous enough to bring electoral reprisal. Are they finding it as difficult to get out of the habit of being the majority as Dems are letting go of the minority mindset?

Surely Rove can't have photos of every one of them fucking goats.

Shortstop beat me to the punch; I also wonder just what the Hell Repubs are thinking? They are charting a course right into the sun. Not believing in warming has its downsides, definitely.

Surely the time has come for an ultimatum from his own party? And when will Rove be carted off to jail or chained in someone's basement? America has not seen such a level of party self-destruction since the Democrats reversed polarity in the mid-19th Century. . .

"so what are you going to do about it?
huh?"

[Posted by: President Bush on July 25, 2007 at 2:00 PM]
_______

Therein lies the rub!!

For as long as our openly despotic Executive Branch and sickeningly complacent Congress do NOT fear reprisals against their insolence, in the form of popular uprisings, they will CONTINUE in EXACTLY the same manner.

The Congress, in particular, will continue to make purely SYMBOLIC gestures, having no genuine teeth, simply to mollify public opinion. And NOTHING will change!

Mere words and peaceful demonstrations will NOT sway those who exhibit only the utmost contempt for the Constitution and our TRADITIONAL form of government -- a government "of the people, BY the people, and FOR the people.".

The time has come to recognize that this radical NeoConNazi coup can only be abolished through RADICAL action! (To those who have ears to hear: "It doesn't take a Weatherman to know which way the wind blows.")

At this juncture, it is no longer the Congress which needs to "grow a spine"; our Legislators clearly will NOT do so in any collective fashion. Rather, it is now solely up to the American people!

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."
~ Thomas Jefferson

Surely Rove can't have photos of every one of them fucking goats.

Posted by: shortstop

But he COULD have some dirt of various kinds on EVERY repubthug. They're running a protection racket. RICO

"PaulB, we're not in disagreement."

Agreed, and I should have made that plainer. I wasn't really contradicting you at all; just doing some random mulling while taking a break from work.